The FBI’s Quiet Plan to Expand Its Hacking Powers

Authorities are asking a little-known rule-making panel to increase the FBI’s search warrant powers to remotely hack into computers.

National Journal
Dustin Volz
Add to Briefcase
Dustin Volz
Nov. 5, 2014, 8:05 a.m.

Gov­ern­ment of­fi­cials are try­ing to ex­pand their au­thor­ity to hack in­to and loc­ate com­puters by chan­ging an ar­cane fed­er­al rule gov­ern­ing how judges can ap­prove search war­rants.

The Justice De­part­ment has pe­ti­tioned a ju­di­cial ad­vis­ory com­mit­tee to amend a rule that spe­cifies un­der what con­di­tions ma­gis­trate judges can grant the gov­ern­ment search war­rants.

The pro­vi­sion, known as Rule 41 of the fed­er­al rules of crim­in­al pro­ced­ure, typ­ic­ally al­lows judges to is­sue search war­rants only with­in their ju­di­cial dis­trict. But the gov­ern­ment has asked to al­ter this re­stric­tion to al­low judges to ap­prove elec­tron­ic sur­veil­lance to find and search a com­puter’s con­tents re­gard­less of its phys­ic­al loc­a­tion, even if the device is sus­pec­ted of be­ing abroad.

Law-en­force­ment in­vest­ig­at­ors are seek­ing the ad­di­tion­al powers to bet­ter track and in­vest­ig­ate crim­in­als who use tech­no­logy to con­ceal their iden­tity and loc­a­tion, a prac­tice that has be­come more com­mon and soph­ist­ic­ated in re­cent years. In­tel­li­gence ana­lysts, when giv­en a war­rant, can in­filt­rate com­puter net­works and cov­ertly in­stall ma­li­cious soft­ware, or mal­ware, that gives them the abil­ity to con­trol the tar­geted device and down­load its con­tents.

Tech­no­logy ex­perts and civil-liber­ties groups strongly op­pose the pro­posed rule change. On Wed­nes­day, sev­er­al of them test­i­fied be­fore the rule-mak­ing com­mit­tee ur­ging a re­jec­tion of the Justice De­part­ment’s pro­pos­al. The rule change, they ar­gued, would be sub­stant­ive and not merely pro­ced­ur­al, mak­ing it bey­ond the in­ten­ded scope of the ad­vis­ory pan­el. They also warned that the ex­pan­sion would threaten the Fourth Amend­ment’s strict lim­it­a­tions on gov­ern­ment search and seizures, and al­low the FBI to vi­ol­ate the sov­er­eignty of for­eign coun­tries.

The ju­di­cial pan­el on Wed­nes­day did little to tip its hand on the is­sue, but it did ag­gress­ively ques­tion sev­er­al wit­nesses as to what al­tern­at­ive they would prefer that al­lows fed­er­al in­vest­ig­at­ors to keep up with and catch elu­sive cy­ber­crim­in­als. Many of the rule’s crit­ics pleaded that a rule change like this should not be de­cided by an ob­scure reg­u­lat­ory pan­el of leg­al ex­perts but by Con­gress.

“I em­path­ize that it is very hard to get a le­gis­lat­ive change,” said Amie Stepan­ovich, seni­or policy coun­sel with Ac­cess, a di­git­al-free­dom group. “However, when you have us re­sort­ing to Con­gress to get in­creased pri­vacy pro­tec­tions, we would also like to see the gov­ern­ment turn to Con­gress to get in­creased sur­veil­lance au­thor­ity.”

Stepan­ovich also warned that the rule change could be ap­plied to large com­puter net­works, such as bot­nets, and breach the pri­vacy of all users com­mu­nic­at­ing via that net­work. While bot­nets, which can some­times in­volve mil­lions of com­puters, are of­ten viewed as sin­is­ter, not all of them are, Stepan­ovich said.

Oth­ers noted that the amend­ment could have dra­mat­ic and un­in­ten­ded con­sequences on for­eign re­la­tions. Sur­veil­lance or­ders gran­ted for com­puters loc­ated in an­oth­er coun­try or where the loc­a­tion is un­known would lack the Fourth Amend­ment’s pro­tec­tion against un­reas­on­able search and seizures, said Ahmed Ghap­pour, a com­puter law pro­fess­or at the Uni­versity of Cali­for­nia’s Hast­ings col­lege of law.

“It’s like turn­ing on a switch, but in­stead of turn­ing on a faucet, it’s like turn­ing on a fire hose,” Ghap­pour, ad­ded, not­ing that the rule change could ush­er in un­pre­ced­en­ted powers to spy on for­eign com­puter net­works.

The FBI has launched an ag­gress­ive cam­paign in re­cent weeks to pre­serve and in some cases ex­pand its elec­tron­ic-sur­veil­lance cap­ab­il­it­ies. FBI Dir­ect­or James Comey has warned that tight­er en­cryp­tion pro­tec­tions on Apple and Google smart­phones could lock out agents try­ing to track crim­in­als ran­ging from ter­ror­ist sus­pects to child por­no­graph­ers. Last week, the agency secretly met with House staffers to dis­cuss le­gis­la­tion that would force U.S. tech com­pan­ies to grant the gov­ern­ment great­er back­door ac­cess to their devices.

Des­pite the FBI’s ef­forts, Con­gress is un­likely to be sup­port­ive of such an agree­ment, as the tech in­dustry has stated it would un­der­mine its glob­al com­pet­it­ive­ness.

The ju­di­cial ad­vis­ory pan­el will meet again in Janu­ary to dis­cuss the Justice De­part­ment’s pro­pos­al.

What We're Following See More »
CITES CONFLICT OF INTEREST
Lieberman Withdraws from Consideration for FBI Job
3 days ago
THE LATEST
MINIMUM 2 PERCENT GDP
Trump Tells NATO Countries To Pay Up
4 days ago
BREAKING
MANAFORT AND FLYNN
Russians Discussed Influencing Trump Through Aides
4 days ago
THE DETAILS

"American spies collected information last summer revealing that senior Russian intelligence and political officials were discussing how to exert influence over Donald J. Trump through his advisers." The conversations centered around Paul Manafort, who was campaign chairman at the time, and Michael Flynn, former national security adviser and then a close campaign surrogate. Both men have been tied heavily with Russia and Flynn is currently at the center of the FBI investigation into possible collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia.

Source:
BUT WHITE HOUSE MAY USE AGAINST HIM ANYWAY
Ethics Cops Clear Mueller to Work on Trump Case
5 days ago
THE LATEST

"Former FBI Director Robert Mueller has been cleared by U.S. Department of Justice ethics experts to oversee an investigation into possible collusion between then-candidate Donald Trump's 2016 election campaign and Russia." Some had speculated that the White House would use "an ethics rule limiting government attorneys from investigating people their former law firm represented" to trip up Mueller's appointment. Jared Kushner is a client of Mueller's firm, WilmerHale. "Although Mueller has now been cleared by the Justice Department, the White House may still use his former law firm's connection to Manafort and Kushner to undermine the findings of his investigation, according to two sources close to the White House."

Source:
BUSINESSES CAN’T PLEAD FIFTH
Senate Intel to Subpoena Two of Flynn’s Businesses
5 days ago
THE LATEST

Senate Intelligence Committee chairman Richard Burr (R-NC) and ranking member Mark Warner (D-VA) will subpoena two businesses owned by former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn. Burr said, "We would like to hear from General Flynn. We'd like to see his documents. We'd like him to tell his story because he publicly said he had a story to tell."

×
×

Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.

Login